lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Dec]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/3] crypto: exynos - Support Exynos5250+ SoCs
Date
It was <2017-12-06 śro 16:28>, when Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Łukasz Stelmach <l.stelmach@samsung.com> wrote:
>> It was <2017-12-06 śro 15:05>, when Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:42 PM, Łukasz Stelmach <l.stelmach@samsung.com> wrote:
>>>> It was <2017-12-05 wto 14:34>, when Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Łukasz Stelmach <l.stelmach@samsung.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Add support for PRNG in Exynos5250+ SoCs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Łukasz Stelmach <l.stelmach@samsung.com>
>>>>>> ---

[...]

>>>>>> + dev_info(&pdev->dev,
>>>>>> + "Exynos Pseudo Random Number Generator (type:%d)\n",
>>>>>
>>>>> dev_dbg, this is not that important information to affect the boot time.
>>>>
>>>> Quite many devices report their presence during boot with such
>>>> messages. For example:
>>>>
>>>> [ 3.390247] exynos-ehci 12110000.usb: EHCI Host Controller
>>>> [ 3.395493] exynos-ehci 12110000.usb: new USB bus registered, assigned bus number 1
>>>> [ 3.403702] exynos-ehci 12110000.usb: irq 80, io mem 0x12110000
>>>> [ 3.431793] exynos-ehci 12110000.usb: USB 2.0 started, EHCI 1.00
>>>>
>>>> From my experience it isn't printk() itself that slows down boot but the
>>>> serial console.
>>>
>>> True, the console is bottleneck (not necessarily serial) [1] but that
>>> does not change the fact there is no need to print the type of RNG.
>>
>> With values of the enum not being meaningful themselves printing the
>> type does not make much sense for me too. Is it ok just to print report
>> the device presence?
>
> This does not change mine arguments - this printk does not bring any
> information except that there is such device. Later you might want to
> print this for Exynos TRNG. Later for other module, and other. Thus I
> prefer not to add it. On the other hand that is not a reason to stop
> this patch so for example you could split it into separate commit.

Done.

> It is kind of unrelated change and keeping it separate will not block
> everything if maintainer will not want it.

I will. As a user a prefer when devices report their presence in the log
buffer and I will submit such patch.

--
Łukasz Stelmach
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
Samsung Electronics
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-12-07 10:21    [W:0.069 / U:1.184 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site